^  wWSWBi'y'Fri 


MA 


*»*!* 


A^ 


.91 


oTER 
ATIVE 

0229 


MICROFILMED  1991 
COLUMBIA  UNIVERSITY  LIBRARIES/NEW  YORK 


46 


as  part  of  the 
Foundations  of  Western  Civilization  Preservation  Project" 


Funded  by  the 
NATIONAL  ENDOWMENT  FOR  THE  HUMANITffiS 


Reproductions  may  not  be  made  without  permission  from 

Columbia  University  Library 


COPYRIGHT  STATEMENT 

The  cop^ :  ^    law  of  the  United  States  -  Title  17,  United 
States  Code  -  concerns  the  making  of  photocopies  or  other 
reproductions  of  copyrighted  material... 

Columbia  University  Library  reserves  the  right  to  refuse  to 
accept  a  copy  order  if,  in  its  judgement,  fulfillment  of  the  order 
would  involve  violation  of  the  copyright  law. 


AUTHOR: 


^J"}  **       ''.^. 


I— iO^ 


F'  i 


Jf 


M. 


LE: 


^■rv.--  .•" ' 


PLACE: 


LO 


,  4**-^*^- 


.;,'         * 


up* 


HTHON 


j|V 


^         it 


#11 


*  i 


OF  THE  RIG 


Tr^^^^'A 


M8«*«ft,*" 


-    r* 


pf  W''% 


COLUMBIA  UNIVERSITY  LIBRARIES 
PRESERVATION  DEPARTMENT 


Master  Negative  U 


mi3LIOGRAPHIC  MICROrORM  TAR  GET 


Original  Material  as  Filmed  -  Existing  Bibliographic  Record 


■i—— W«— |illl  ■■■!'■         ■  ■"■ 


:         Extract   Prorn    ^^t    spttcK   dil'ivtrd 
a  T^-AS.  ■  nojat    of    lords...  April  17,  l&ll,    "m    rht 
JoUr-io     oT-N   i-Ka     oill..."Por    -tha    removal    of  ^ht 


■«     on 


c^sc  jaliricsT^ona    undtT  '    ,  wKlcK    His    Maitslus 


r 


rm     f      '  ■    wj     III       1  iy»     p  ■ 


19  3  GA2,5LorQarL_.cati:iolJ-C_.5ubjtck._no^ 
"^-"^        London  \bZ^.        0.         \9p. 


Jabojx 


» 


p- 


No.    7     of  a  volume  of  pamphlets. 


■0 


Restrictions  on  Use: 

TECTiNIC aTmIcROFORM  DATA 

FILM     SIZE: ^^J2?J22^__  REDUCTION     RATIO:       //v 

IMA^E  PLACEMENT:    lA   (f^     IB     IIB  

DAfE     FILMED: ^l//i9/__^     INITI  ALS__i/i^liP^__ 

HLMEDBY:    RESEARCH  PUBLICATIONS.  INC  WOODURIDCH.  CT 


zW?^ 


■rt       .    "5^ 


«*'0»l^eWB^T  rf*r*^*  •,-,♦»     J-    t    a  fr^     lWHfc<%^^     *       *,- 


c 


Association  for  information  and  Image  IManagement 

1100  Wayne  Avenue,  Suite  1100 
Silver  Spring,  Maryland  20910 

301/587-8202 


Centimeter 

1         2        3 

iiiiiiiiiliiiiliiiiliiii 


8 


T 


T 


Inches 


iiiiIiiiiIhiiIiiiiImiiIiihIiiiiIiiiiIiiiiIiiiiIi 
M     I  II  I     I  I  M     I  M  M  II 


1 


9 

iiiliii 


10       11        12       13       14       15    mm 

iiiiliiiilniiliiiiliiiiliiiiliiiiliiiiliiiilmiliiii 


1.0 


I.I 


1.25 


141      2.8 

12.5 

1^ 

1^     lp-2 

2.2 

■  63 

V      IIP-' 

Isl        III 

IS    l^a 

2.0 

L& 

»-      u 

bUb 

1.8 

1.4 

1.6 

I  i  I 


TTT 


MRNUFfiCTURED    TO   fillM   STRNDfiRDS 
BY   fiPPLIED   IMfiGE,     INC. 


I**' 


l\ 


EXTRACT 


FROM    THE 


SPEECH  OF  LORD  GRENVILLE, 


SjX,     S^C>     S)'€, 


/ 


)H  0 .  T. 


EXTRACT 


FROM    THE 


SPEECH 


OF    THE 


RIGHT  HON.  LORD  GRENVILLE, 


Chancellor  of  the  University  of  Oxford,  8^c.  8^c.  Sfc. 


DELIVERED  IN  THE  HOUSE  OF  LORDS, 


On  Tuesday,  April  17,  1821, 


IN    THE 


DEBATE  ON  THE  BILL 

BROUGHT  UP  FROM  THE  HOUSE  OF  COMMONS 

"  For  the    Removal  of   the    Disqualifications  under  which    His 
Majcsti/s  Roman  Catholic  Subjects  now  labour.*^ 


LONDON: 


PRINTED  rOR  J.  BOOKER,  61,  NEW  BOND  STREET; 

BY  J.  F.  DOVE,  ST.  JOHN'S  SQUARE. 

1822. 


IV 


1^ 


l^\ 


EXTRACT, 


Sfc. 


Should  I  have  the  misfortune  of  finding  that 
your  Lordships  differ  from  me  upon  the  gene- 
ral principle  of  this  Bill,  which  I  consider  as 
an  act  of  justice^  due  to  the  whole  body  of  our 
fellow-subjects,  professing  the  Roman  Catholic 
faith,  I  must  still  remind  your  Lordships,  that 
there  is  a  portion  of  that  body  who  have  come 
before  you  as  separate  petitioners,  whose  case 
this  Bill  includes,  and  to  whose  unanswerable 
claims,  I  am  at  a  loss  to  conceive  what  argu- 
ment can  be  opposed. 

This  bill  comes  before  us,  recommended  on 
the  most  mature  deliberation  by  the  Commons 
House  of  Parliament.  On  every  part  of  it,  their 
authority  is  of  the  greatest  weight,  but  it  is  more 
especially  so  in  respect  to  tTie  most  important 
provision  of  this  measure  ;  a  provision  on  which, 


6 

as  it  relates  to  the  composition  of  that  assem- 
bly itself,  it  was  their  peculiar,  though  certainly 
by  no  means,  their  exclusive  province  to  de- 
cide.     This   decision  they  have   accordingly 
made  ;  not  lightly  nor  inconsiderately,  but  with 
a  full  sense  of  its  importance,  with  a  deep  im- 
pression of  its  benefits.     They,  the  represen- 
tatives of  the  whole  body  of  the  people  of  this 
United  Kingdom,  united  I  trust  not  in  the  law 
only,  but  in  interest  and  affection;  they  tell 
us  in  this  Bill,  that  after  long,  repeated,  and 
deliberate  consideration,  they  see  no  danger, 
but,  on  the  contrary,  the  greatest  possible  ad- 
vantage,  to  all  the  best  interests  of  the  state, 
from   extending  to  the   Roman  Catholic,   an 
equal  eligibility  with  the  Protestant,  to  share 
in  their  deliberations.     They  are  willing,  they 
are  solicitous  to  admit  him,  to  participate  with 
them  in  the  high  trusts  and  duties,  which  he, 
like  them,  may  derive  from  the  confidence  of 
their  electors.     They  know  not  on  whom  that 
choice  may  fall ;  this  is  for  their  constituents  to 
determine.     But  they  feel  the  most  entire  as- 
surance, that  these  differences  of  religious  faith, 


such  as  they  now  exist,  afford  nO  ground  what- 
ever for  narrowing  the  choice  of  the  elector,  or 
for  disqualifying  him  who  may  be  chosen,  from 
availing  himself  of  that  high  distinction,  and 
sharing  with  them  in  the  councils  of  his  country. 
Your  Lordships  have  now  a  similar  question 
to  consider  with  respect  to  your  own  House ; 
but  you  approach  it  in  a  very  different  manner. 
You  have  to  determine  upon  the  wisdom  and 
justice  of  admitting  into  this  high  assembly, 
not  a  new  class  of  persons,  whose  numbers,  and 
whose  individual  characters,  you  cannot  previ- 
ously anticipate ;— but  peers  of  parliament ;— but 
members  of  your  ownbody ;— menof  the  highest 
birth  and  rank ;— holding  their  title  to  sit  and 
vote  in  this  House,  by  the  same  right  of  heredi- 
tary descent,  which  they  enjoy  in  common  with 
your  Lordships,  and  which  they  trace  (in  nearly 
all  their  cases)    to  a  much  higher  antiquity, 
than  most  of  those  whom  I  have  now  the  ho- 
nour to  address.     It  is  your^  at  this  hour  to 
judge,  and  to  pronounce  in  the  face  of  the  world, 
whether  it  be  now  necessary,  and,  if  it  be  not 
necessary,  it  cannot  be  just,  to  continue  that 


\ 


)/ 


8 

painful  deprivation,  by  which  some  of  the  most 
illustrious,  and  ancient  members  of  your  body, 
are  debarred  of  their  legitimate,  of  their  here- 
ditary, and  constitutional  rights,  and  by  which 
the  whole  body  of  the  peerage  is  in  their  per- 
sons crippled  and  degraded. — Thereis  no  doubt 
as  to  the  extent  or  operation  of  this  measure ; 
your  Lordships  know  the  persons  to  whom  it 
applies,  you  see  their  numbers,  and  none  are 
so  well  enabled  as  yourselves  to  judge  of  their 
principles  and  characters. 

On  these  it  would  indeed  be  gratifying  both 
to  me  and  to  your  Lordships^  that  I  should  di- 
late ;  but  in  this  place,  and  on  this  occasion,  it 
would  be  worse  than  superfluous.  It  would 
seem  to  imply  doubt  and  distrust,  where  none 
can  possibly  exist.  Living  as  they  have  lived, 
among  those  whom  I  now  address,  they  have 
long  since  been  well  and  thoroughly  known  to 
you.  But  if  there  be  in  this  numerous  and 
high  assembly,  a  single  individual,  who  enter- 
tains the  smallest  apprehension  on  that  subject, 
of  him  I  should  request,  that  he  would  select 
from  among  the  six  or  seven  distinguished  per- 


!'■■ 


9 

sonages  in  question,  one  name  to  which  suspi- 
cion has  ever  attached,  or  that  he  would  state 
any  plausible  ground,  for  the  belief  that  any 
thing  but  honour,  advantage,  security,  and  cre- 
dit to  ourselves,  could  arise  from  admitting 
these  ancient  peers  to  the  enjoyment  of  their 
hereditary  rights,  and  from  obtaining  to  our- 
selves, and  to  the  public,  the  benefit  of  their  co- 
operation and  assistance  in  the  arduous  con- 
cerns of  our  country. 

Your  Lordships  will  be  pleased  to  bear  in 
mind^  that  no  new  concession  is  here  asked,  no 
fresh  privilege  contended  for.  This  is  an  ori- 
ginal right,  restricted,  not  forfeited  ;  suspended, 
not  destroyed:  a  right  derived  from  the  highest 
sources,  recognized  by  British  jurisprudence, 
and  co-ordinate  with  the  fundiamental  prin- 
ciples of  our  government  itself.  The  ancient  in- 
heritance of  these  noble  peers  is  inherent  in  their 
persons,  constitutionally  annexed  to  their  rank 
and  station,  and  of  which  they  cannot  even  for 
a  moment  be  deprived,  but  by  regular  process 
of  law,  or  by  extraordinary  legislative  interpo- 
sition, grounded  on  overruling  necessity. 


I 


!• 


10 

The  question  here  relates  to  an  original  right: 
It  is  therefore  incunibent  upon  those,  who  op- 
pose this  respectful,  but  confident  claim,  to 
shew  either  that  the  exclusion  was  originally 
founded  on  proof  and  conviction  of  some  hei- 
nous crime,  corrupting  in  its  source  the  stream 
in  which  their  rights  have  been  transmitted  to 
them,  or,  that  it  was  adopted  for  the  necessary 
security  of  the  state,  and  cannot  now  be  re- 
scinded, without  again  exposing  the  community 
to  manifest  and  imminent  danger.  With  re- 
spect to  the  imputation  of  crime,  who  will  now 
allege  it?  Who  is  so  ignorant  of  our  own  his- 
tory, as  not  to  know,  that  the  guilt  of  those 
horrible  transactions,  of  which  this  exclusion 
forms  a  part  (stained  as  they  are  with  the  most 
nefarious  guilt),  attaches  to  all  who  were  in 
any  shape  concerned  in  them,  excepting  only 
on  their  unhap[)y  victims?  The  ancestors  of 
these  noble  persons  suflFered  that  sanguinary 
persecution  ;  they  themselves  now  labour  under 
this  cruel  and  unjust  degradation,  in  conse- 
quence of  the  memorable,  and  infamous  perju- 
ries, of  the  execrable  Titus  Oates  and  his  ac- 


11 

complices.     It  is  to  the  crimes  of  those  atro- 
cious wretches,  not  to  the  principles  of  the  Re- 
volution, that  we  trace  the  exclusion  of  the  Ro- 
man Catholic  peers  from  the  enjoyment  of  their 
ancient  birthright.  The  principles  of  the  Revo- 
lution are  abhorrent  from  such  iniquities.     The 
act  from  which  they  pray  to  be  relieved,  pass- 
ed not  in  the  reign  of  William,  but  in  that  of 
Charles;  not  one  of  the  best,   but  one  of  the 
worst  monarchs   that  ever  filled  the  English 
throne  :  not  in  that  era  to  which  we  look  back 
with  pride  and  gratitude,  but  in  that  which  ne- 
ver can  be  remembered  without  shame  and  in- 
di2:nation,  without  detestation  and  horror. 

Greatly  would  it  redound  to  the  character 
and  honour  of  our  country,  were  it  possible, 
that  not  only  this  gross  injustice,  of  which  these 
noble  persons  now  complain,  but  that  with  it, 
every  other  trace  and  memorial  of  that  humi- 
liating portion  of  our  history,  could  be  torn  from 
our  records,  and  obliterated  from  the  remem- 
brance of  mankind !  But  to  the  interests  of 
mankind  itself,  it  is  of  far  greater  importance, 
that  the  memory  of  these  horrid  crimes  should 


I 


12 


13 


be  perpetaated,  that  they  should  remain  to  bear 
witness  against  their  actors,  even  to  the  latest 
periods  of  the  world  ;  fixed  as  a  beacon  and 
land-mark  to  all  succeeding  generations,  a 
dreadful  example  of  the  excesses  into  which 
men,  otherwise  moderate  and  virtuous,  may  be 
hurried  by  the  impulse  of  factious  zeal  and  re- 
ligious animosities;  a  memorable  warning  to 
all  public  parties  how  wicked  and  how  perilous 
it  is  to  irritate  and  to  inflame  these  furious  pas- 
sions, to  mix  them  in  political  contest,  to  arm 
religious  sects  against  each  other  in  civil  strife, 
and  to  teach  them  reciprocally  to  palliate  and 
even  to  applaud  their  own  injustice  and  cruelty, 
on  the  detestable  plea  of  retaliation  against 
their  adversaries. 

Among  the  transactions  of  which  I  have 
been  speaking,  there  are  two  principal  acts 
of  the  English  Legislature  for  which  it  is  im- 
possible to  account  on  any  other  ground  but 
from  that  evil  principle.  These  acts,  stand  pro- 
minent among  the  immediate  consequences  of 
the  gross  imposture  and  astonishing  delusion 
of  the  Popish  Plot,  and  of  the  shameful  en- 


1^ 


couragement  given  by  Parliament  to  that  atro- 
cious fabrication :  one  of  them,  I  grieve  to  say 
it,  casts  a  deep  and  peculiar  stain  upon  this  as- 
sembly.— It  is  nothing  less  than  the  judicial 

MURDER  OF  ONE  OF  YOUR  OWN  MEMBERS,  LoRD 

Stafford,  a  peer  venerable  in  age,  unblemished 
in  character;  accused  on  evidence  unworthy 
of  credit  in  any  case,  and  pursued  with  unre- 
lenting fury  to  the  scaffold,  on  a  charge  so  ma- 
nifestly absurd,  contradictory,  and  impossible, 
that  no  evidence  could  have  established  it  to 
the  satisfaction  of  an  impartial  and  calm  tribu- 
nal, resolute  to  discharge  its  duty  in  defiance 
of  popular  delusion.  And  let  me  here  remark, 
that,  when  the  cruelties  exercised  in  former 
ages  under  the  sanction  of  popes  or  councils, 
or  of  any  other  ecclesiastical  or  civil  authority, 
are  referred  to  for  the  purpose  of  vilifying  our 
fellow  Christians  of  the  present  day;  those 
who  indulge  in  such  remembrances  would  do 
well  to  recollect  with  humiliation  what  may  be 
urged  of  such  an  act  as  this,  committed  in  the 
much  later  period  of  Charles  II.  and  by  the 
ParliamentofEngland;— a  criminal  proceeding. 


i 


f 


14 

carried  on  at  the  suit  of  the  Coiunions ;— judged 
by  the  Lords;— and  executed  under  the  autho- 
rity of  the  Crown:  but  of  which  Mr.  Fox  has 
truly  said,  that  it  casts  an  indelible  disgrace  on 
all  concerned  in  it,  king;  parliament;  judges; 
juries;  witnesses;  and  prosecutors. 

Nor  was  this  act,  horrible  as  it  was,  the  ju- 
dicial murder  of  a  peer,  the  only  crime  to  which 
these  iniquities  gave  birth.    It  was  on  the  same 
monstrous  evidence  of  Gates  and  his  accom- 
plices, imputing  the  same  impossible  guilt,  that 
many  other  such  murders  were  committed  by 
the  other  tribunals  of  the  land;  and  it  was  on 
the  same  ground,  and  under  the  influence  of  the 
same  blind,  but  too  voluntary  delusion,  that 
Parliament,  unsated  with  individual  vengeance, 
proceeded  to  enact  that  general  disqualifying 
statute  which  at  this  hour  excludes  these  peti- 
tioners from  their  birthright.— A  law  of  high 
and  severe  punishment,  but  in  which,  not  even 
the  most  ordinary  forms  of  justice  w-ere  ob- 
served. There  was  in  this  case  no  trial ; — no  sen- 
tence ; — no  attainder  ; — but  the  legislature  act- 
ing in  blind  subserviency  to  the  maddened  fury 


r 


15 

of  the  moment,  visited  on  the  whole  body  of 
the  peers  professing  the  Roman  Catholic  reli- 
gion ;  men  innocent,  untried,  some  of  them  un- 
accused ;  the  same  foul  and  false  imputations 
on  which  they  proceeded  to  the  unjust  destruc- 
tion of  an  individual. 

This  cruel  statute  is  the  second  of  the  two 
Acts  of  that  period  of  which   I  have  spoken  : 
the  first  indeed  in  date,  and  second  only  to  the 
other  in  injustice  ;  and  it  is  from  this  that  these 
Petitioners  now  pray  to  be  relieved.    Is  it  pos- 
sible that  you  can  refuse  their  prayer  ?  An  un- 
just prescription  was  established  against  the 
innocent  of  former  times,  will  you  maintain  it 
against  their  descendants? — men   not  merely 
blameless,   but  worthy  of  all  honour  ?    what 
would  this  be,  but  to  declare  our  own  adherence 
to  these  transactions,  and  seemingly  to  counte- 
nance, what  in  reality  you  most  condemn,  the 
guilt  and  shame  of  their  original  contrivers  ? 

Your  Lordships  contemplate  with  horror  the 
murder  of  Lord  Stafford — will  you  continue 
to  punish  HIS  descendants  for  a  crime  of  which 
he  could  not  by  possibility  have  been  guilty?  will 


f 


16 

you  refuse  to  the  descendants  of  that  most  in- 
nocent and  injured  nobleman^  and  to  the  de- 
scendants of  his  fellow-sufferers,  that  portion 
of  justice  which  it  is  still  within  your  power  to 
extend  to  them? — will  you  sanction  by  your 
own  authority,  will  you  adopt  as  your  own  act, 
all  that  still  remains  to  be  executed  of  that 
enormous  and  unexampled  wrong? 

The  wisdom  of  this  country,  and  its  humanity, 
which  is  its  best  wisdom, has,  I  rejoice  to  say  it, 
in  our  day,  been  prone  to  a  reversal  of  attainders, 
even  of  those  whose  justice  was  unquestioned  : 
but  here  are  cases  of  continued  and  protracted 
punishment,  where  nothing  but  innocence  can 
be  traced  through  the  long  track  of  proscrip- 
tion ;  cases,  in  which  men  of  the  highest  birth 
and  character  are  still  deprived  of  their  inheri- 
tance, in  consequence  of  an  unjust  prejudice, 
resting  solely  on  the  evidence  of  the  most  infa- 
mous witnesses,  and  in  a  case,  in  which  the  in- 
nocence of  the  accused  was,  only  four  years 
after  his  execution,  solemnly  recognized  and 
declared  by  his  judges  ! 

My  Lords,  it  cannot  be  upon  this  ground  of 


I 


f®:; 


17 

pretended  guilt,  no  one  can  be  found  to  argue 
for  the  maintenance  of  this  proscription. 

Is  it  possible  then,  that  any  public  necessity 
can  be  alleged  in  its  support  ?  How  is  it  that 
the  restoration  of  justice  to  the  innocent,  is  to 
produce  danger  to  the  state  ?  What,  can  the 
state  be  endangered  by  the  admission  of  the 
Duke  of  Norfolk  to  the  full  enjoyment  of  his 
ancient  and  hereditary  honours?— Will  the  in- 
terests of  the  Crown;  will  the  dignity  of  this 
House ;  will  the  authority  of  parliamtiU;  or  will 
the  mixed  and  venerable  Constitution  of  our 
Country  suffer  from  ^25  taking  his  place  amongst 
us,  as  the  first  in  rank  and  dignity,  even  in  this 
great  and  high  assembly  ?—  Will  the  glory  of  the 
English  name  be  tarnished,  or  will  the  heroic 
ardourofits  present  champion  be  discouraged  by 
ourrecalHng  the  Earl  of  Shrewsbury  to  the 
functions  of  that  dignity  which  he  derives  from 
his  great  ancestor,  the  reward,  as  we  are  told  in 
history,  of  more  than  forty  victories  gained  in 
the  service  of  our  country  ? 

But  I  rest  too  long  on  this  point;  this  notion 
of  danger  from    the  admission   of  right,  this 

B 


18 

supposed  duty  of  denying  justice  lest  evil 
should  ensue,  is  unworthy  even  of  an  argu- 
ment in  this  place.  Your  Lordships  know, 
all  who  hear  me  know,  that  no  such  danger 

really  does  exist. 

I  forbear,  therefore,  to  press  these  topics  far- 
ther ;  I  will  say  nothing  at  this  time  of  the  con- 
stitutional tendency,  of  that  precedent,  which 
Parliament  has  left  us  by  this  statute ;  a  pre- 
cedent of  suspending  without  crime,  and  with- 
out necessity,  those  legislative  functions  which 
the  constitution  had  created.  A  precedent,  well 
worthy  the  deliberate  reflection  of  those  whofeel 
as  your  Lordships  do,  that  your  hereditary  right 
to  share  in  the  councils  of  our  country,  is  not 
given  for  the  gratification  of  individual  vanity, 
or  the  exaltation  of  personal  dignity  ;  but  on 
principles  of  the  highest  public  policy,  and  for 
the  most  important  benefit  to  the  interests  of 
the  whole  community. 

The  grievance  which  I  have  now  been  endea- 
vouring to  recommend  to  the  favourable  atten- 
tion of  your  Lordships,  forms  however  but  a 
small  part  of  the  great  measure,  on  which  we 


I 

1: 


19 

are  this  day  deliberating.  I  feel  deeply  for 
these  noble  persons  ;  their  case  is,  in  my  judg- 
ment, one  of  almost  unexampled  injustice  and 
cruelty  ;  but  let  no  man  imagine,  that  I  wish  to 
confine  to  them  the  redress  which  is  asked  for 
all.  I  am  unalterably  convinced,  that  much 
more  than  the  remedy  of  this  partial  wrong  is 
the  necessary  duty  of  Parliament.  There  truly 
is  a  state  necessity  which  does  apply  to  this 
whole  subject — the  necessity  of  doing  full  and 
speedy  justice  to  the  great  body  of  these  our 
fellow-subjects.  Until  this  be  done,  the  peril 
is,  in  my  judgment,  imminent ;  and  it  is  conti- 
nually increasing.  The  mischiefs  already  pro- 
duced by  the  past  unhappy  disappointments  of 
this  measure  are  infinite  and  irremediable;  and 
in  every  hour's  delay  there  is  a  rapid  progres- 
sion of  accumulating  evil. 


Printed  bj  J.  P,  Dove,  St.  John's  Sqaare. 


I 


Jl' 


